All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants of the misapprehension of the legal doctrine are deemed to be lawful as it saws a saw one time per month, which is merely a temporary entertainment level.

B. The lower court’s sentence (Defendant A: fine of 2 million won and confiscation; fine of 3 million won and confiscation; fine of 3 million won and confiscation; Defendant C: fine of 7 million won and confiscation) against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, the limit of illegality in the crime of gambling should be specifically determined by referring to all circumstances, such as the time and place of gambling, the social status and property level of gambling, the nature of property, and other circumstances leading to gambling.

(See Supreme Court Decision 85Do2096 delivered on November 12, 1985, etc.). The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 85Do2096 delivered on November 12, 1985). In other words, the Defendants: (a) 1 meta-to-face in a so-called “hak” from 03:30 hours during the night to 07:00,000; (b) the Defendants, the main agent of which, at the time of the investigation by the investigative agency, had been engaged in the instant gambling with KRW 1.50,00 won at each of the 100,000 won; (c) the Defendants were gathered in the instant place to gambling without any special opportunity; and (d) the Defendants made a statement that the Defendants made a hack-to-saw statement to the effect that they were merely Defendant A’s one-stop.”

Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion of legal principles is without merit.

B. There are favorable circumstances such as the Defendants’ refusal to gambling again on the assertion of unfair sentencing.

(b).